Hahaha! National Review smears climate scientist, dares him to sue, begs for cash to defend suit!

Like his claim to be a Nobel laureate, the charges against NR are baseless and very much worth fighting. National Review doesn’t look to get itself sued, but neither does it shy from a fight, especially one like this. Rich Lowry’s response to Mann’s legal threats exactly captures our mood and determination.

As many of you know, National Review is not a non-profit — we are just not profitable. A lawsuit is not something we can fund with money we don’t have. Of course, we’ll do whatever we have to do to find ourselves victorious in court and Professor Mann thoroughly defeated, as he so richly deserves to be. Meanwhile, we have to hire attorneys, which ain’t cheap.

The bills are already mounting.

This is our fight, legally. But with the global-warming extremists going all-out to silence critics, it’s your fight too, morally. When we were sued, we heard from many of you who expressed a desire to help underwrite our legal defense. We deeply appreciated the outpouring of promised help.

Now we really need it.

Whodda thunk it? A crappy publication that pushes junk science and writing finds itself the victim of the free market--no one wants to buy it, so it's cash strapped. And now defending itself from a victim of its smear campaigns.

2. They should ask the Koch brothers. n/t

3. "not a non-profit — we are just not profitable" - shouldn't they pack up, then?

By their free market principles, it's clear not enough people want to buy their shit. It's a pretty pathetic magazine/website that can't afford to defend one libel case, especially one whose editor writes chest-beating crap like "we look forward to teaching him a thing or two about the law and about how free debate works in a free country".